Teradata Corp. v. Sap Se
| Decision Date | 08 November 2021 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 18-cv-03670-WHO |
| Citation | 570 F.Supp.3d 810 |
| Parties | TERADATA CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SAP SE, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California |
Bradley Stuart Lui, Daniel Pierre Muino, George Brian Busey, Mark L. Whitaker, Mary Prendergast, Aaron Douglas Rauh, David D. Cross, Eileen Mary Brogan, Pro Hac Vice, Fahd H. Patel, Pro Hac Vice, Fitz Beckwith Collings, Pro Hac Vice, Michelle L. Yocum, Pro Hac Vice, Robert W. Manoso, Pro Hac Vice, Shouvik Biswas, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Washington, DC, Aaron David Dakin Bray, Erik J. Olson, James R. Hancock, Roman A. Swoopes, Sean W. Kang, Bryan Joseph Wilson, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Palo Alto, CA, Christian Gabriel Andreu-von Euw, Morrison Foerster LLP, San Diego, CA, Jack Williford Londen, Mathieu Swiderski, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA, Jayson L. Cohen, Pro Hac Vice, Morrison and Foerster LLP, New York, NY, Sean Paul Gates, Charis Lex P.C., Pasadena, CA, Todd B. Carver, Pro Hac Vice, Attorney at Law, Dayton, OH, Wendy Joy Ray, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiffs Teradata Corporation, Teradata Operations, Inc.
Bradley Stuart Lui, Daniel Pierre Muino, George Brian Busey, Mark L. Whitaker, Mary Prendergast, Aaron Douglas Rauh, David D. Cross, Eileen Mary Brogan, Pro Hac Vice, Fahd H. Patel, Pro Hac Vice, Fitz Beckwith Collings, Pro Hac Vice, Michelle L. Yocum, Pro Hac Vice, Robert W. Manoso, Pro Hac Vice, Shouvik Biswas, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Washington, DC, Aaron David Dakin Bray, Erik J. Olson, James R. Hancock, Roman A. Swoopes, Sean W. Kang, Bryan Joseph Wilson, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Palo Alto, CA, Christian Gabriel Andreu-von Euw, Morrison Foerster LLP, San Diego, CA, Jack Williford Londen, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA, Jayson L. Cohen, Pro Hac Vice, Morrison and Foerster LLP, New York, NY, Sean Paul Gates, Charis Lex P.C., Pasadena, CA, Todd B. Carver, Pro Hac Vice, Attorney at Law, Dayton, OH, Wendy Joy Ray, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff Teradata US, Inc.
Roy Chamcharas, Garth Alan Winn, Pro Hac Vice, J. Christopher Carraway, John D. Vandenberg, Klaus Hemingway Hamm, Kristin L. Cleveland, Mark W. Wilson, Pro Hac Vice, Kyle B. Rinehart, Pro Hac Vice, Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, Portland, OR, Tharan Gregory Lanier, Catherine Tara Zeng, Jones Day, Palo Alto, CA, Crystal Marissa Johnson, Kenneth A. Gallo, Pro Hac Vice, Megan Freeland Raymond, Pro Hac Vice, Stefan Geirhofer, Pro Hac Vice, J. Steven Baughman, Pro Hac Vice, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison LLP, Geoffrey D. Oliver, Pro Hac Vice, Jones Day, Washington, DC, H. Albert Liou, Pro Hac Vice, Joseph M. Beauchamp, Joshua Lee Fuchs, Justin White, Pro Hac Vice, Jones Day, Houston, TX, Nathaniel Peardon Garrett, Jones Day, San Francisco, CA, William Michael, Pro Hac Vice, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison LLP, New York, NY, for Defendants SAP SE, SAP America, Inc., SAP Labs LLC.
REDACTED – ORDER RE MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTIONS TO EXCLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY
Re: Dkt. Nos. 466, 467, 470, 472, 474, 476, 480, 495
Defendants SAP SE, SAP America, Inc., and SAP Labs, LLC (collectively "SAP") move for summary judgment on plaintiffs Teradata Corporation, Teradata US, Inc., and Teradata Operations, Inc.’s (collectively "Teradata") technical trade secret claims, business trade secret claims, and tying claim. Teradata also moves for summary judgment and argues that counterclaim-plaintiff SAP SE's U.S. Patent No. 8,214,321 ("’321 Patent") is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. It argues that SAP is not entitled to damages for the alleged infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,617,179 ("’179 Patent"), and 9,626,421 ("’421 Patent") before May 19, 2019. Teradata also moves to exclude portions of four of SAP's expert's opinions: Tim Kraska, Stephen Horn, Gregory Leonard and Ouri Wolfson, and Sharad Mehrotra. SAP moves to exclude portions of one of Teradata's expert's opinions, John Asker.
For the reasons explained below, SAP's motion for summary judgment on Teradata's technical trade secret claims and tying claim is GRANTED. Its motion related to Teradata's business trade secret claims under the DTSA is DENIED as moot. Its motion to exclude portions of Asker's report is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Teradata's motion for summary judgment on the invalidity of the ’321 Patent is GRANTED. Its motion for partial summary judgment against an award of damages for infringement of the ’179 and ’421 Patents before May 21, 2019, is also GRANTED. Its motion to exclude portions of Kraska's expert report is DENIED as moot. Its motion to exclude portions of Horn's report is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Its motion to exclude portions of the Leonard and Wolfson reports is DENIED in part as moot and DENIED in part on the merits. Its motion to exclude portions of Mehrotra's report is DENIED.1
Teradata conducts research, development, engineering, and other technical operations related to its Enterprise Data Analytics and Warehousing ("EDAW" or "EDW") products. See Dkt. No. 67 ("SAC") ¶ 4. Teradata's flagship product is the Teradata Database, a relational database management system designed for EDW. SAC ¶ 16. Teradata was the first commercial EDW vendor to utilize massively parallel processing ("MPP") through Teradata Database to execute high volumes of analytical queries on massive amounts of data for EDAW customers. Dkt. No. 528-9 ("Walter Decl.") ¶ 3.
SAP is best known for Enterprise Resource Planning ("ERP") software, historically designed to run on transactional databases such as those by Oracle, IBM, and Microsoft. Dkt. No. 462-5 ("Anicich Decl.") ¶ 39. SAP's ERP applications do not, and have never, run on top of Teradata's analytical database. Dkt. No. 467-5 ("Mehrotra Decl.") ¶ 127.
ERP Applications allow companies to manage data required to conduct their day-to-day operations across numerous aspects of the business enterprise and are typically designed around a relational transactional database that can ensure users have access to a uniform and current set of data. Id. ; Dkt. No. 452-11 ("Stiroh Rep.") ¶ 10; Anicich Decl. ¶¶ 24–28. Transactional databases are also known as "online transactional processing" ("OLTP") databases and are typically "row-based," which is advantageous for processing transactions, such as pay roll data, and running a large number of simple transactions concurrently. Mehrotra Decl. ¶ 53.
In contrast, analytical applications are designed to run on a second type of database, known as an analytics or "OLAP" database. Dkt. No. 463-15 ("Sell Depo.") at 18–19. These databases typically store data in columns to optimize the running of a small number of queries with a large number of complex records. Mehrotra Decl. ¶ 60; Dkt. No. 562-6 ("Kraska Decl.") ¶ 22. There are three different types of analytical databases: (1) data marts; (2) enterprise data warehouses ("EDWs"); and (3) data lakes. Sell Depo. at 14. EDWs are large-structured analytics databases that draw data from different sources, e.g., transactional databases, across an enterprise. Id. at 13.
In 2009, SAP and Teradata entered into a partnership referred to as the "Bridge Project" to combine SAP's ERP Applications and SAP BW tool interface with Teradata's MPP architecture that it uses in Teradata Database for EDW. Kraska Decl. ¶ 161. During the Bridge Project, Teradata provided SAP with access to its confidential information. SAC ¶ 35. The parties executed two agreements to formalize the Bridge Project, the Software Development Cooperation Agreement ("SDCA") and the Technology Partner Agreement ("TPA"). SAC ¶ 32. These agreements restricted disclosures of each parties’ confidential information. Id. The parties also entered into a mutual non-disclosure agreement ("Mutual NDA") in December 2008 and June 2009 ("NDAs"). Id.
Through the Bridge Project, SAP and Teradata jointly developed "Teradata Foundation" which enabled SAP's ERP applications to use Teradata for the transactional database and data-analytics for EDW activities. Dkt. No. 528-5 ("Graas Decl.") ¶¶ 6–9. While the Bridge Project was underway, SAP was developing another EDW product called SAP HANA ("HANA"). Dkt. No. 530-39 ("Primsch Depo.") at 362. By June 2011, HANA was commercially available. After nearly three years in the Bridge Project, and two months after HANA was made available, SAP unilaterally terminated the joint venture and stopped supporting, selling, and marketing Teradata Foundation. Dkt. No. 529-25 at 068.
In February 2015, SAP launched its latest version of ERP Application, SAP S/4HANA and combined its ERP Application and EDAW products into a single sales offering. S/4HANA is integrated to operate on top of SAP's HANA database, a translytical database with both transactional and analytical functionalities. Anicich Decl. ¶ 40. Customers can purchase HANA either with a full-use license, with no restrictions on how the data within HANA can be used, or a lower-cost limited-use "runtime" license, with database use limited to supporting S/4HANA. Dkt. No. 467-53 ("Zenus Depo.") at 105–115. In other words, if customers want to export their own data from HANA for use with third-party products, they must pay an additional license fee, i.e., an exit fee. Dkt. No. 532-41 at 583.
On June 19, 2018, Teradata filed a complaint against SAP alleging, among other things, misappropriation of its trade secrets and violation of antitrust laws.2 Dkt. No. 1. On December 12, 2018, I granted in part and dismissed in part SAP's motion to dismiss. Dkt. No. 65 ("MTD Order"). On December 21, 2018, Teradata filed a second amended complaint alleging that SAP disingenuously entered a joint venture with it to steal its trade secrets and develop a competing product, HANA, misappropriating trade secrets, and violating antitrust laws in the process. See Dkt. No. 67 ("SAC"). The following...
To continue reading
Request your trial